A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

The intent of the rule is well thought out. Too many injuries occurring from defenseless players. I actually like the rule more for the defensive player than the one on offense. There has been too much glorification of spearing with the crown of the helmet. Very dangerous for the defensive player. Kids breaking their necks or otherwise damaging their spine.

You never saw Ronnie Lott doing that and that guy was one of the hardest hitting SOB's ever. For whatever reason proper techniques in tackling have been lost over the years. So, while it's not an ideal way to teach proper fundamentals it is forcing kids to take a more fundamental approach to "hitting" and tackling in those situations. For that reason, I think the rule is good.

The problem is still way too much subjectivity and variance from how it is enforced. And is ejection the appropriate penalty? Perhaps the right approach would be to follow the unsportsmanlike rule. Get two and then you are ejected?? Not sure but they definitely need to look at some sort of changes in the offseason. Just my take.

(12-22-2016 12:37 PM)ThreeifbyLightning Wrote:  The intent of the rule is well thought out. Too many injuries occurring from defenseless players. I actually like the rule more for the defensive player than the one on offense. There has been too much glorification of spearing with the crown of the helmet. Very dangerous for the defensive player. Kids breaking their necks or otherwise damaging their spine.

You never saw Ronnie Lott doing that and that guy was one of the hardest hitting SOB's ever. For whatever reason proper techniques in tackling have been lost over the years. So, while it's not an ideal way to teach proper fundamentals it is forcing kids to take a more fundamental approach to "hitting" and tackling in those situations. For that reason, I think the rule is good.

The problem is still way too much subjectivity and variance from how it is enforced. And is ejection the appropriate penalty? Perhaps the right approach would be to follow the unsportsmanlike rule. Get two and then you are ejected?? Not sure but they definitely need to look at some sort of changes in the offseason. Just my take.

I am with you on the enforcement of the rule. However the way they are enforcing it is questionable. For example the definition of defenseless player is being stretched and thinned as refs please. Taking into consideration if its really intentional or something that happens out of control changes some of these calls. I am not saying that just leave the players unpunished if its not intentional but have a penalty and let them go when its not after all FB is a physical game.

(12-22-2016 12:22 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

I do know the call on the WKU player was textbook targeting. But i have seen some called that were very questionable. It if very judgmental and i think the reviewers seem to air on the side of calling for targeting than not.

In this, our concussion-conscious sporting society, the NCAA is going to err on the side of an abundance of caution when it comes to head-and-neck stuff. And while I think they tend to be a little heavy-handed, I'd rather put up with it in the here and now if it diminishes the chances that we see a player die on our TV and tablet screens.

(12-22-2016 02:00 PM)va-eagle Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 12:22 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

I do know the call on the WKU player was textbook targeting. But i have seen some called that were very questionable. It if very judgmental and i think the reviewers seem to air on the side of calling for targeting than not.

It was? Our guy hit Memphis player on the shoulder pad then backed off...THat was not a "textbook targeting" call...That was a horrible call and even the announcers were besides themselves that call was upheld based on the replay...Truth is these refs look silly with some of these calls and makes it even worse when they are shown replay and still have the call stand....If they had kicked our other 2nd guy out due to targeting, might have been a riot because that was no where near targeting either...

(12-22-2016 03:03 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 02:00 PM)va-eagle Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 12:22 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

I do know the call on the WKU player was textbook targeting. But i have seen some called that were very questionable. It if very judgmental and i think the reviewers seem to air on the side of calling for targeting than not.

It was? Our guy hit Memphis player on the shoulder pad then backed off...THat was not a "textbook targeting" call...That was a horrible call and even the announcers were besides themselves that call was upheld based on the replay...Truth is these refs look silly with some of these calls and makes it even worse when they are shown replay and still have the call stand....If they had kicked our other 2nd guy out due to targeting, might have been a riot because that was no where near targeting either...

Yeah that was a terrible call. I believe it was Desmond Howard calling the game and he was in disbelief over the call.

The problem is that the power to make a judgement call has been removed. "Targeting" implies intent, which is 100% subjective, but the way the rule is written you can make most any hit "targeting" if you want (since launching is considering targeting and most players launch themselves into their opponents to make a tackle). I think they need to stop looking a the letter of the law and start throwing the flags based on intent. Joel was not trying to hurt a defenseless player. He was trying to ensure the opponent didn't complete the catch. He hit him straight up, trying as much as possible to avoid helmet to helmet contact, and once he could he stopped his momentum and released from the opposing player. I understand how the rule is written now, but it needs to be changed going forward.

(12-22-2016 03:24 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 03:03 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 02:00 PM)va-eagle Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 12:22 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

I do know the call on the WKU player was textbook targeting. But i have seen some called that were very questionable. It if very judgmental and i think the reviewers seem to air on the side of calling for targeting than not.

It was? Our guy hit Memphis player on the shoulder pad then backed off...THat was not a "textbook targeting" call...That was a horrible call and even the announcers were besides themselves that call was upheld based on the replay...Truth is these refs look silly with some of these calls and makes it even worse when they are shown replay and still have the call stand....If they had kicked our other 2nd guy out due to targeting, might have been a riot because that was no where near targeting either...

Yeah that was a terrible call. I believe it was Desmond Howard calling the game and he was in disbelief over the call.

Sorry, your right. Just looked at replay and mixing up another game.

I don't like the ejection part of the rule for bowl games unless it's obvious, especially for seniors playing their last college game. Maybe make them sit for a series or give them a second chance like they do for unsportsmanlike conduct.

(12-22-2016 05:25 PM)va-eagle Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 03:24 PM)BlazintheATL Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 03:03 PM)WKUFan518 Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 02:00 PM)va-eagle Wrote:  

(12-22-2016 12:22 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

I do know the call on the WKU player was textbook targeting. But i have seen some called that were very questionable. It if very judgmental and i think the reviewers seem to air on the side of calling for targeting than not.

It was? Our guy hit Memphis player on the shoulder pad then backed off...THat was not a "textbook targeting" call...That was a horrible call and even the announcers were besides themselves that call was upheld based on the replay...Truth is these refs look silly with some of these calls and makes it even worse when they are shown replay and still have the call stand....If they had kicked our other 2nd guy out due to targeting, might have been a riot because that was no where near targeting either...

Yeah that was a terrible call. I believe it was Desmond Howard calling the game and he was in disbelief over the call.

Sorry, your right. Just looked at replay and mixing up another game.

They must fix that call somehow, a home grown Bowling Green kid had to leave the stadium in his bowl game because of some toothless prick probably bet on Memphis. Point is they made a bad call and it wasnt just a penalty, it ejected a kid for making a great legal football play

LOL. Conspiracy theory much?

I don't know how you legislate intent, like was mentioned in an earlier post. Scenario - a guy launches at the QB. Not he QB ducks and the defensive player completely whiffs, makes no contact at all. Are you of the opinion that the defensive player should be ejected because it sure looked like he intended to target the QB? How can you bemoan judgement calls and then have referees trying to determine intent on the fly?

Here's the easy answer. Wrap up and you will never get targeting. "See what you hit" and you won't get targeting. In other words - stop trying to knock guys out and just tackle them.

(12-22-2016 12:22 PM)12thmonarch Wrote:  A lot of targeting calls and at least one ejection per game for the ones i watched. Are these calls really intended to make the game injury free or they trying to wussify football. Some of these calls are horrible. What do you think?

I think they need to put flags on 'em and be done with it.